Yes but you better not remove one millimeter from a female's genitals...Because unlike males; females were not born with redundant, nonfunctional, nerve-free tissues.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes but you better not remove one millimeter from a female's genitals...Because unlike males; females were not born with redundant, nonfunctional, nerve-free tissues.I have noticed, I think, that all but ONE poster in this thread who gives a dissenting opinion on circumcision are males. All the ladies seem to be saying "So what, it's not like they chopped off your whole member or something. Life goes on."
Good point. Just shows that they are arguing to argue.
How do you know she's going to get breast cancer?
Please educate yourself before making such statements. Obviously, all the world's major health bodies are on the same page with regard to the health benefits of circumcision. They've done numerous studies and they are in agreement. Here's a link to the CDC about the benefits, results, low complication rates and differences in satisfaction levels.
Male Circumcision and Risk for HIV Transmission: Implications for the United States | Factsheets | CDC HIV/AIDS
How do you define "consent"?
There are expectations in numerous cultures that at a certain age, one will go through a (potentially painful) rite of passage. It's not a matter of "consent", it's an expectation. You *will* do it. Because you're supposed to.
At what point is it not ok to force western cultural values on others?
This is in response to people who say they do it for health reasons, namely prevention of HIV.
Would you support the minority of cases of female circumcision that are done in a sterile medical facility with a medical expert and drugs to ease pain?
Citation needed
The said benefits apply to sexually active men. Why not let them choose to have the circumcision when the time comes rather than forcing it on them.
No, it is usually about forcing religious or cultural viewpoints on children. In a minority of circumstances it is about control or coping with the issues of the parents, or about health and hygiene.
No, fortunately not nearly as much bacteria and viruses as a labia...
I have noticed, I think, that all but ONE poster in this thread who gives a dissenting opinion on circumcision are males. All the ladies seem to be saying "So what, it's not like they chopped off your whole member or something. Life goes on."
I find this interesting.
We don't. But there is a not-insignificant risk that she will.
How do you know he's going to get HIV?
Also, breast cancer rates among women are higher than HIV/AIDS rates among men. And in all those cases, removal of the breasts beforehand would have prevented the cancer. Removing the foreskin is only partially effective at preventing HIV transmission. So not only are early mastectomies going to prevent more deaths, they are also more successful at doing so than circumcision.
Why don't you think it is extremely rare for men in technologically advanced countries to have themselves circumcised? Virtually all of those countries have national healthcare that covers the cost of medical problems.I posted several long (and rather indignant) comments on why this is: anatomical differences and the cultural reasons behind it. Sorry I'm too lazy to re-write them.
"It"? Could you clarify?
Does your lack of foreskin somehow make you doubt your atheist beliefs?Would you be more of an unbeliever if you still had it?
Agreed. No one has the right to unnecessarily surgically alter another person's genitals without their express consent - which a newborn obviously cannot do. Religious views, no matter how strongly held, don't grant this right.Is religious circumcision ethical?
Is it right to remove a babies foreskin without consent for religious reasons?
In my view, this is unlawful genital mutilation.
I have noticed, I think, that all but ONE poster in this thread who gives a dissenting opinion on circumcision are males. All the ladies seem to be saying "So what, it's not like they chopped off your whole member or something. Life goes on."
I find this interesting.
The vast majority of everything I said in this thread is opinion or ethical in nature. I try to back up most statistics I state. If you wish to contest a claim I made I will be happy to back it up or admit having no foundation on which to make the claim.How funny! I use loads of links with references to support the facts and you don't use a single one to backup your points.
Wouldn't you, if someone threatened to chop bits of it off without your permission?I think it clearly demonstrates that men are overly obsessed with their penises.
Can a woman transmit breast cancer to men like men can HIV, herpes, HPV, etc. to women?
I remember a comment like that but personally I don't see the point either.
(I'm not clear on the details so don't take my word for it) The Jewish religion is one of the few which can actually be inherited. Seemingly circumcision is a reflection of this.
Veritas said:So they chopped off your penis?
Good point. Just shows that they are arguing to argue.
Functional? You mean to habor bacteria and viruses?
Solution: don't have sex. Problem solvedDid it ocurr to you that women have a reason for wanting a man to be cut? I realize it doesn't mean anything to you, but for over 95% of the male population, it should. I don't want to have STD's including HPV which leads to cervical cancer transmitted to me. Gee, how selfish of me.
A woman can "transmit" both BRCA1 and BRCA2 breast cancer genes to her daughters. Would you advicate removing her daughters breast to prevent a future cancer since it occurance maybe much more likely?Can a woman transmit breast cancer to men like men can HIV, herpes, HPV, etc. to women?
Aradia said:At what point is it not ok to force western cultural values on others?
Can a woman transmit breast cancer to men like men can HIV, herpes, HPV, etc. to women?
The foetus is not yet human, or, at least, not human enough to be granted human rights. A newborn, however, is.Another very good point! Admittedly I'm very confused about some of the opinions mentioned on this thread:
- It's not OK to remove a piece of skin from a newborn (because he cannot consent to any changes of his body) but it's OK to end the life of a foetus (because it's the 'property' of the mother).
Nope. It's because cutting pieces of another's body without their consent is fundamentally wrong. The sheer fact that this is mandated by religion is irrelevant.
- It's not OK for Jews to force their religious beliefs on an infant (because the infant has no concept of religion) but it's OK for atheists to decide how theists should act (because religious is a delusion and atheists know they're right).
Indeed. You'll notice that birth isn't the limit for abortion - 22 weeks is (give or take international variations). This is the general limit when a foetus is deemed to be sufficiently gestated to be granted human rights. Prior to that, it is not developed enough to have those rights.What is it about birth which suddenly makes the foetus / baby a person? My own rather cynical answer is that a foetus cannot scream or cry when it is being removed, but a baby having it's foreskin cut off can. Then again many of them scream and cry when they're being vaccinated too.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?